[HPN] SF Coalition Challanges "Homeless Court" Program As Unconstitutional FWD Unconstitutional FWD

[Tom Boland]

CC REPLIES please TO: "Coalition on Homelessness, SF" <coh@sfo.com>
              and TO: Homeless People's Network via <wgcp@earthlink.net>

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2000/02/09/MN7770
0.DTL&type=printable
FWD  San Francisco Chronicle - Wednesday, February 9, 2000

     COURT PROGRAM FOR HOMELESS IS CHALLENGED

     ADVOCATES SAY TARGETING IS UNFAIR

     Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer

SAN FRANCISCO -- A fledgling effort by the San Francisco city attorney's
office to prosecute ``quality of life'' crimes faces a potentially
crippling legal challenge by homeless advocates who claim the effort
is unconstitutional.

Two lawyers in City Attorney Louise Renne's office were recently
deputized as prosecutors to handle nuisance cases in San Francisco
traffic court. The $250,000 program, authorized last year by Mayor
Willie Brown and the Board of Supervisors, was supposed to be an
answer to cries by merchants and residents for relief from homeless
people who urinate, drink in public or loiter around businesses.

Under the plan, those who appear in court are encouraged to
perform community service, undergo job training or other alternatives
in lieu of being fined.

The effort officially began January 24, but on the first day more
than two dozen cases were delayed when an attorney for the Coalition
on Homelessness challenged the program as unfairly targeting homeless
people for special prosecution.

As a result, the court has dealt with only 13 cases in the past
two weeks. Of those, several have been referred to community service,
one to job training and two others to a program that teaches English
as a second language.

Not just the court challenge has slowed the program. Several
offenders have simply not shown, while in other cases the police did
not file the proper paperwork, said Deputy City Attorney Ilene Dick,
who is one of the prosecutors in the unit.

The two dozen cases handled by the Coalition on Homelessness have
been put off, pending a hearing set for February 18.

Adam Arms, an attorney for the coalition, said yesterday that
having deputy city attorneys act as district attorneys was an ``end
run'' around the City Charter.

``They can't just switch roles like that,'' he said. ``That is
shady, behind-the-board dealings -- the Board of Supervisors can't
manage prosecutions through the budget.''
He said that having a prosecutor in court puts the cases on a
different level from traffic tickets and other minor infractions.

``We are worried about folks who don't have representation who are
getting bullied through the system, when they are not guilty of any
crime other than be homeless,'' Arms said.

``They go after you and unless you lick stamps at a nonprofit for
four or six hours, you are out of luck.''

Deputy City Attorney Kimon Manolius said he is optimistic the city
can win the court case. ``I think we are well within the Charter and
state law limitations,'' he said. ``I am not concerned about our
ability to go forward.''

He said city officials had reviewed similar efforts in New York
and elsewhere in crafting San Francisco's program. ``We took a long
look at it to make sure we did it right,'' Manolius said.

``If they win, I guess we don't do it anymore,'' he added.

The few cases that have gone through the court show that San
Francisco is doing the right thing, Manolius said. ``We are not
seeking fines. We are trying to get folks to get city services or do
community service. That's why it's so exciting -- someone who came
through the system is going through job training.

``This is not a program that prosecutes homeless people,'' Manolius
said. ``It's a program that tries to deal with the tremendous number
of police citations that nothing was happening on. Most of these
citations were being dismissed, because no one was showing up on
behalf of the city.''

The Board of Supervisors' Finance Committee will conduct a hearing
today on the status of the effort.

``Last year, there was contention around (the issue of) was this
really needed,'' said board President Tom Ammiano, who opposed it.
``Now that it has started, I want to know what they are doing. I felt
all along that this wasn't necessary, that this was the D.A.'s job.''

END FORWARD

**In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.**

***********************************************************
7,500+ articles by or via homeless & ex-homeless people
INFO & to join/leave list - Tom Boland <wgcp@earthlink.net>
Nothing About Us Without Us - Democratize Public Policy
***********************************************************